W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-p3p-public-comments@w3.org > March 2001

Proposal for changes in purpose vocabulary

From: Melissa Dunn <mwdunn@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 13:14:35 -0800
Message-ID: <EEB8065F4CADF747831418494160C0746359AF@RED-MSG-13.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "'www-p3p-public-comments@w3.org'" <www-p3p-public-comments@w3.org>
During the P3P face-to-face, there was a discussion of removing CUS and
replacing its intent through the use of either 

*	TAIi
	where the user's information is not stored and therefore expires at
the end of the current session (e.g. getting the local TV listings on
demand)
*	IVDi
	where the user's information is stored and can be linked to PII and
reused across sessions (e.g. sending email suggesting that I might want to
pre-order the next Harry Potter book because I have purchased other Harry
Potter books from the site)
*	PSDi
	where the user's information is stored and not linked to PII and
reused across sessions (e.g. getting local news on your home page, which
requires postal code retention)

The difficulties here are that there are several classes of Web activities
that can not be properly described by these categories: personalization,
address books and form filling.

Scenario 1: Personalization (e.g. Welcome [username] on the home page) is
meant to make the site appear "friendly". The site would have to declare
IVDa under the current definitions. Yet, in the context of personalization,
PII may not be linked or even linkable to non-PII. 

Scenario 2: Address Books are becoming more common on e-tailer sites where
they try to create a simple user experience for filling out the SHIP TO
sections of their order forms. The sites typically ask for a nickname and
then the real shipping information. The user can then simply pick the
nickname from a drop down list and the site fills in the rest of the form.
The user knows that they are storing the information on the site and the
primary purpose for which the information is being used. The user does not
explicitly opt-in/opt-out. The opt-in is implicit since the user gave the
information. The PII information is not about the user, but is about user
contacts. The information may or may not be linkable to other users (e.g. I
give my best friend's address. My best friend uses the same site. They link
us on my best friend's name/address - my shipping and her billing match. The
site now knows how to cross-sell)

Scenario 3: Form Filling is also becoming a common activity: gator,
roboforms, etc. are all dedicated to assisting the user by storing
information and then using that information to fill forms. As more and more
people move to the use of "not so smart" client devices, the more likely
that personal information is to be stored by a service that fills the form
using a key mechanism, such as a persona ID, etc. The primary purpose of
collecting the information is for form filling, much as Current, though the
information is persisted over time. There may or may not be any way for form
filling sites to link PII to non-PII.

In order to account for these activities, I propose that the P3P purpose
vocabulary be expanded to include:

Personalization: secondary usage of persisted PII the intent of which is to
create a more personal experience (e.g. Welcome [username])
Personal Assistance: primary usage of persisted PII that must not be linked
to non-PII or cross-linked to other PII, the intent of which is to assist
the user in a form-filling task, such as address books, one-click billing,
etc.

The following compact policies would then describe the scenarios listed
above:

Scenario 1: P3P:CP="PER OUR PHY"

Scenario 2: P3P:CP="PRA IVDa OUR PHY"

Scenario 3: P3P:CP="PRA OUR PHY"

Because Scenario 2 allows for the site to cross link data, and they choose
to do so, then the site must also declare IVDa as it is making decisions
that impact this user and possible other users based upon the PII provided.

General Comments: 

*	Personalization is an innocuous activity and will rarely be anything
other than "always", as I can't conceive of a site asking whether they can
use the consumer's name for personalizing the site. The real concern should
be whether the user was asked to opt-in/opt-out for the PII in the first
place.
*	Personal Assistance is a primary use category that most often
involves implicit opt-in: meaning that the user gave the site the
information for the stated purpose directly, though no opt-in was explicitly
given. This is much like the Current, except that the PII is retained and
re-used to assist the user in completing the current activity (ship to, bill
to, filling out registration forms, etc.) As such, should it need the
"required" attribute. The main difference between this and Current is
retention and re-use.




Melissa
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2001 16:15:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.1 : Tuesday, 21 September 2004 12:14:17 GMT